I believe that the number of rotation array you ask surrimpose themselves and blocks the boolean process!
With 3 or 5 that works fine!
For 6 or 8 there are overlaps!

Thanks.

Hi Brian,

> Michael
> Is there any reason why this array will not booleen join please?

There's a few different problems in here... Like Pilou mentions, you actually have some duplicate objects that are stacked up right on top of each other, that definitely won't help. Actually the top one seems to have 3 copies stacked on top of each other.

Also like Pilou mentions, having the "end seams" of the surfaces all in one area will just magnify the difficulty for the booleans to figure out which piece intersects with what...

Like this end:



That's quite a number of edges all sticking kind of partially through each other... Things like that will cause difficulty for the booleans, as it progresses piece by piece, each piece will tend to create little tiny slivers where these things kind of barely graze by each other.

Also some of the pieces are not quite aligned in a fully symmetrical way, like here:



One piece seems to be sticking out a bit more, if you have more precise regularity to the pieces it would probably help.

But you mention that you want to boolean it from a sphere?

Please take a look at Danny's illustration here: http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI&msg=1792.12

Building the sphere in one segment first and then replicating those grooved segments will be a far more robust way to create that kind of thing because it will avoid this kind of "barely grazing" type of curved overlaps that cause problems.

- Michael

Thanks Michael.

However, you may like to look at the two 3dm files and the screen grab?
Something odd to me-----why there were those duplicates and out of allignments may be a bug?

Brian

PS---I think I see the problem, I should have set the angle to 180 not left it at 360! AaaaGhhhhh!

Hi Brian, yeah if you have something that is closed if you replicate around a whole 360 degree circle you will get duplicates.

For alignment I'd kind of need to see your original curve framework to see what is going on there.

- Michael

AND, it should have been 135 deg NOT 180!

Not a Brian day is it!

Brian

And here is the setup for the original sweep.

It was a long, slow learning curve but eventually, with segments etc I think this is close to what I had in mind.
The second image shows the first failure!

Brian

Hi Brian,

> And here is the setup for the original sweep.

That one seems to be looking good.

What I noticed in the file that you sent was that other parts were not centered around the origin, like here:



Notice how that ring is all to one side of the axis line instead of being centered around it?

- Michael

Hi Brian, looks like one of those chocolate oranges! :)

- Michael

Michael
Your earlier post.
A real difficulty, still, perhaps, in ascertaining the exact X on which one has to click on.
A problem that may be unsolvable other than super extreme close ups of the points of sellection?
(and a mind set in which the "naming" of those X points register in the old brain?)

Chocalate Orange!
THAT is easy, piece of cake etc!
MoI beginners stuff!(I am happy to say!)


Brian

Hi Brian,

> A problem that may be unsolvable other than super extreme
> close ups of the points of sellection?

It's definitely not bad to zoom in to get a closer look on things, but if you're trying to work around the origin 0,0,0 point, then try to focus on the object snap text that is displayed - when it is grabbing on to that point, it will say "origin" on the little tag there, if it says something else like "on" or "mid" or stuff like that and doesn't say "origin" on it at all, then you're grabbing some other point on an object or axis line instead of that 0,0,0 point.

- Michael